Marseille — Timing

Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and idempotentHint=true, so the safety profile is clear. The description adds no new behavioral traits beyond stating it is a single card, and it does not contradict annotations.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The description is extremely concise, containing only two lines plus an example. It includes a group label and example, but lacks structured sections (e.g., purpose, usage).

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

For a single-parameter tool with informative annotations, the description is minimally adequate. However, it omits any explanation of what a 'timing card' returns or how the result should be interpreted, which would be helpful.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

The input schema only describes 'body' as raw JSON referencing the description. The description provides a concrete example with fields (seed, question, allowReversed), adding necessary meaning beyond the abstract schema.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description 'Single timing card' plus the tool name clearly indicates a tarot draw focused on timing, distinguishing it from multi-card draws or general interpretations. However, it does not explicitly contrast with siblings like tarot_marseille_draw_single.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

No guidance on when to use this tool versus other tarot tools (e.g., when a timing question vs. general draw is appropriate). The example shows a question but no contextual cues.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.